Minds and Machines

, Volume 13, Issue 2, pp 257–268 | Cite as

A Reductio of Kripke-Wittgenstein's Objections to Dispositionalism about Meaning

  • Jakob Hohwy


A central part of Kripke's influential interpretation of Wittgenstein's sceptical argument about meaning is the rejection of dispositional analyses of what it is for a word to mean what it does (Kripke, 1982). In this paper I show that Kripke's arguments prove too much: if they were right, they would preclude not only the idea that dispositional properties can make statements about the meanings of words true, but also the idea that dispositional properties can make true statements about paradigmatic dispositional properties such as a cup's fragility or a person's bravery. However, since dispositional properties can make such statements true, Kripke-Wittgenstein's arguments against dispositionalism about meaning are mistaken.

dispositions meaning normativity sceptical paradox 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Boghossian, P. (1989), 'The Rule-Following Considerations', Mind 98, pp. 507–549.Google Scholar
  2. Burgess, J. (1984), 'Perceptual Knowledge and Normal Conditions,' Artisan 2.Google Scholar
  3. Coates, P. (1997), 'Meaning, Mistake and Miscalculation', Minds and Machines 7, pp. 171-197.Google Scholar
  4. Forbes, G. (1984), 'Scepticism and Semantic Knowledge', Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, LXXXIV.Google Scholar
  5. Ginet, C. (1992), 'The Dispositionalist Solution to Wittgenstein's Problem of Following a Rule: Answering Kripke's Objections', Midwest Studies in Philosophy XVII.Google Scholar
  6. Heil, J. and Martin, C. B. (1998), 'Rules and Powers', in J. E. Tomberlin, ed., Philosophical Perspectives vol. 12: Language, Mind and Ontology, Atascadero, CA: Ridgeview Press.Google Scholar
  7. Horwich, P. (1998), Meaning, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Hohwy, J. (2001), 'Semantic Primitivism and Normativity', Ratio 14, pp. 1–17.Google Scholar
  9. Humberstone, I. L. (1997), 'Two Types of Circularity', Philosophy and Phenomenological Research LVII, pp. 249–280.Google Scholar
  10. Johnston, M. (1992), 'How to Speak of the Colours', Philosophical Studies 68, pp. 221-263.Google Scholar
  11. Johnston, M. (1993), 'Objectivity Refigured: Pragmatism without Verificationism', in J. Haldane and C. Wright, eds., Reality, Representation and Projection, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Kripke, S. (1982), Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Language, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  13. Lewis, D. (1997), 'Finkish Dispositions,' Philosophical Quarterly 47, pp. 143–157.Google Scholar
  14. Miller, A. (1997a), 'Boghossian on Reductive Dispositionalism about Content: The Case Strengthened', Mind and Language 12, pp. 1–10.Google Scholar
  15. Miller, A. (1997b), Philosophy of Language, London: UCL Press.Google Scholar
  16. Martin, C.B. (1994), 'Dispositions and Conditionals', Philosophical Quarterly 44, pp. 1–8.Google Scholar
  17. Pettit, P. (1990), 'The Reality of Rule-Following', Mind 99, pp. 1–21.Google Scholar
  18. Pettit, P. (1993), The Common Mind, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Pettit, P.. (1999), 'A Theory of Normal and Ideal Conditions', Philosophical Studies 65, pp. 21–44.Google Scholar
  20. Stalnaker, R. (1984), Inquiry, Boston, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  21. Toribio, J. (1999), 'Meaning, Dispositions and Normativity,' Minds and Machines 9, pp. 399–413.Google Scholar
  22. Wittgenstein, L. (1953), Philosophical Investigations, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jakob Hohwy
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyAarhus UniversityAarhus CDenmark

Personalised recommendations